I was curious to know the range of prices you find for stock images.
1. As a buyer, what is a typical range you expect to pay?
Printable View
I was curious to know the range of prices you find for stock images.
1. As a buyer, what is a typical range you expect to pay?
I paid $6 for a nice world map drawing to use as the background to a chart last night. It's the first time I've checked out all of the new budget stock photo sites that've popped up recently. I was really surprised. I expected, and was willing, to pay a lot more.
Where did you get it from Dan?
http://www.istockphoto.com
Came from the Useful Photography Links thread here :)
What I expect to pay depends on the usage:
From Low end: Image for the web (low-med res), that anyone can buy: Real cheap (I.E. Istockphoto procing.)
to
High End: Image in High Res for use in Print, with no resale to other parties (i.e. Buyer won't see a competitor with the same image). Lots of $$$
I found a site that had taken some pictures of us dancing at a competition, and they were charging $40 for a digital copy (personal use), but $210 for "editorial use". Big difference.
If they are pictures of "you" dancing, do they have a model release?
I signed nothing at the competition.
In that case I would notify the site. They can't sell your identifiable photo without your permission. (Well apparently they "can", but they aren't supposed to.)
Of course, this is off-topic to your original question. I agree with Brian -- depending on resolution and use you can expect to pay any amount from a dollar up (and then there ARE the "free sites" :( )
According to my experience iStock have best images but it isn't cheap like on other agencies.
I wrote small comparative article about them..
http://www.mangiaphoto.com/compare-f...rs/2007/01/31/
In few words, you can expect prices from $0.25 to $20-$30 and price depends from image size, did you "pay per download" user or subscriber ... etc..
They could sell the dance pics for "editorial" use without permission.
Other sale (for personal use) though is probably prohibited. (there might have been something in the competition paperwork granting the rights though)
That's right... although on most of these micro payment sites, so many people are downloading images that I doubt very much it is possible to even enforce licenses. I'm a contributor at a bunch of those sites and I don't particularly care if a few people step outside the bounds of the license with my images, but I've often wondered how the "editorial only" license is ever enforced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steelsun
Yes, I was thinking this too. I would also expect that the photographer is probably happy to get my $40 versus nothing at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by helix7
Right.Quote:
Originally Posted by dvduval
Especially in microstock, no one is putting their images up there expecting big money in a single sale, nor should they be expecting to easily track the usage of the images purchased. Some images sell hundreds of times. It's not realistic to keep track of how those images are used.
If someone were concerned about usage, traditional stock agencies would be the way to go instead, where you get far less sales but higher individual commissions, and usage is easier to track.